If they're barely above the poverty level then how the hell are they affording Apple products?

Two answers:

The iPhone is now given away for free. It is the first choice of the impoverished class, because it is MUCH more affordable than the BOGO Android phones, which require you to lay out 2 or 3 hundred bucks in cash.

School systems generally are the ones who buy iPads if their students are impoverished.

But the OP seemingly would deprive not only the rural schoolchildren, but would also deny even the struggling working class. If he were to accomplish what he wishes for, the advantages that Apple brings to people's lives would be denied even to the most deserving.

OK. So because some Koreans are underserving of Apple's blessings, then the impoverished schoolchildren struggling to just keep their heads above poverty should also be denied the chance to advance themselves with using Apple products.

Yes, that would be one consequence of my policies if I were in charge. And people in poverty shouldn't be buying or using Apple products. They can get by with a much cheaper netbook. That makes much more economic sense.

The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.

The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.

Your links are completely broken and don't make any sense.

Which is probably okay, because your post doesn't seem to have a point.

Reminds me greatly of The Jerusalem Duality (S01E12 Big Bang Theory) where Sheldon was trying to talk people into creating an exact replica of Jerusalem in the Mexican desert

Wow coincidence. I don't watch much sit-com TV, but I just recently saw one of their episodes for the first time and that was actually the one, however I came in in the middle of the program after that Jerusalem scene. I just watched it online right now. Pretty funny show. I'll have to try to watch it more often.

I'm not getting into a mudslinging contest on this matter, but Apple/Jobs has/had a fairly good history of ripping people's ideas off. Remember Watson/Sherlock? Fax as a printer (that one goes back to the NeXT era), etc.

Or we could start with Windows and the Mouse which were stolen from Xerox PARC. At the time Jobs' attitude was: "You can't patent gravity" meaning: there's only one way of doing something naturally right, because it's the nature of the thing, and there can't be patents on such things.

How things change when the company is no longer the underdog, but a company with one of the highest market caps, even beating Exxon at times (not sure where they stand right now, but it doesn't really matters, since underdog is hardly the way to label Apple at this stage of the game.)

I just wish the people who are so quick to decent Apple on ethical grounds would also be equally quick on ethical grounds to condemn Apple for retaining ownership of a device you lawfully bought by preventing the lawful owner of having root-access to the device, and treating users like chattel by deciding for them what they may or may not do on a computer with internal phone peripheral that they own.

A non-jailbroken phone is essentially unusable, for a variety of reasons, not least of which because the proximity sensor doesn't work properly with dry skin or longer hair. On a jailbroken phone I can install CallLock, and the problem is solved. And that's just the one feature that's the most relevant to the thing being a phone. There are plenty of other things that require a jailbreak, too, and no, piracy isn't one of them. I don't have a single pirated app, and have no intention of owning any, either.

The thing is, Apple rips off small developers who don't have the resources to stage that kind of legal offense/defense like Samsung, so you never hear anything about it.
When I had some ideas that I would have liked to discuss with Apple, they said, patent it first, or if we like it, we'll simply do it without you. (That's pretty much a verbatim quote).
If you have any idea of how expensive it is to apply for a patent, and even more so, to defend it, then you start to realize that patents have long ceased to protect and support small inventors, but have become weapons in the arsenal of large industrial conglomerates to duke it out with each other; just as we now see it between Apple and Samsung.

Your links are completely broken and don't make any sense.
Which is probably okay, because your post doesn't seem to have a point.

Thank you for your response. You are correct that the link appears to be broken. It is not. Rather, Samsung redirected that ancient 2008 page for the ancient Galaxy Player 50 to prevent people unwilling to do research from mistakenly thinking that that 2008 page for the Galaxy Player 50 has some connection with the new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 released in the US on Oct/16/2011.

How about those specs? Exciting, right? Gives the iPod Touch something to shoot for for the next update that goes beyond offering white. Nothing wrong with those specs links, I hope.

or we could start with windows and the mouse which were stolen from xerox parc.

Wrong!!

There was an agreement between Apple and Xerox which allowed Xerox to buy Apple shares at a real cheap rate. Apple didn't sneak into the Xerox Parc facilities, they were invited there as part of the deal.

Most likely, a disgruntled employee, combined with lavish control, is the reason for this blatant thievery to slip through.

Before I read this article and its comments, I did not know that there was a difference between the iPhone "Maps" app and the one for Android. I'd assumed they were the same because they both used Google's maps data.

Maybe the person/people who made the promotional image did not understand this either, and just thought they were the same.

Just throwing out the possibility that this whole fiasco was not intentional. I'm not saying it's any less stupid, maybe just less sinister. \

People don't want Android music players. I mean, that's what this is, right? I don't see any phone hardware on the list.

I apologize for not making it clear that the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 ($230) and 5.0 ($270) are more advanced iPod Touch 4th Gen. ($200) competitors. I mistakenly assumed that my request to directly compare specs between the products connoted the relationship.

The new Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 are basically WiFi-only versions of the popular Samsung Galaxy S smartphone, i.e. they don't have a cellular radio. The primary differences are the 4inch and 5inch displays, respectively.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

Specs don't matter. Experience does.

Some countering examples:

-- Two people are in a WiFi dead zone, the one with Galaxy Player 4.0 and the other with an iPod Touch 4th Gen. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can listen to FM radio to get the latest news on NPR.

-- The same two people want to put a bunch of mp4 movies on their devices for a 14hour flight. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can slap in a microSD card (up to 32GB) to expand beyond the stock 8GB internal storage without upgrading to a new device or erasing a bunch of stuff to make room.

-- The same two are web surfing and (Oops!) come across a page with Adobe Flash, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can load and use the page properly.

-- The same two are out camping and want to mark the exact spot for their next trip, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0's GPS can do so.

-- Ring, ring, a VOIP call comes in that they wants to keep private; the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 has a phone-like ear speaker to use while the other has to hunt for some earphones.

-- Both want to set a silent alarm, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can set a vibrate-only alarm to avoid blasting the alarm to the general public.

-- The battery is dying from heavy use over the years, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can simply slap a new battery in while the other must pay $70+shipping.

-- Both want to take a photo. The one with the Galaxy Player 4.0's 3.2MP back camera (plus LED flash for the 5.0) is likely to be happier with the shot than the other one with the ~0.7MP back camera.

Specs drive the experience as much as the OS.

Given your experience, what does the iPod Touch 4th Gen. appear to do better than the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0?

-- The same two people want to put a bunch of mp4 movies on their devices for a 14hour flight. Only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can slap in a microSD card (up to 32GB) to expand beyond the stock 8GB internal storage without upgrading to a new device or erasing a bunch of stuff to make room.

It's a shame, then, that the guy with the iPod touch has a 64GB model, larger than the Samsung device could ever be.

Quote:

-- The same two are web surfing and (Oops!) come across a page with Adobe Flash, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can load and use the page properly.

The iPod touch owner laughs as he isn't forced to look at ads and kill his battery life while experiencing slowdown of his device.

Seriously, you troll? You think Flash is a SELLING point? It's a selling point NOT to have Flash.

Quote:

-- Ring, ring, a VOIP call comes in that they wants to keep private; the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 has a phone-like ear speaker to use while the other has to hunt for some earphones.

Sounds like whoever this is wants a phone, really.

And is this VoIP call out in the forest where we're camping? WOW, that's some serious Wi-Fi coverage or maybe I'm confusing your device for something actually useful.

Quote:

-- The battery is dying from heavy use over the years, only the one with the Galaxy Player 4.0 can simply slap a new battery in while the other must pay $70+shipping.

Again, it's a shame that by the time either device's battery is dead, the Android user will have moved on through two hardware revisions to get the new software updates he wants while the iPod touch owner simply shrugs, reminisces about the YEARS of actual use he got out of the device, and either hands it off to a family member or recycles it for a 10% discount on his brand new model iPod touch.

Quote:

Specs drive the experience as much as the OS.

And yet no one buys these. But they do buy iPod touches.

Quote:

Given your experience, what does the iPod Touch 4th Gen. appear to do better than the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0?

It appears to sell better, as, again, I've never heard of these two monstrosities before now.

And it would certainly seem to get software updates more often. "At all" is the key phrase, I think, given the track record for Android hardware that is "clearly" superior.

The Samsung Galaxy Player 50 webpage http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50/ has NOTHING to do with the new "Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0" and "Samsung Galaxy Player 5.0" released in the US on Oct/16/2011.

Same goes for my home country, the UK. The anti-american shit that I hear disgusts me. The people here are brainwashed by a socialist propaganda station called the BBC who pump out a contiguous stream of reasons why socialism works and capitalism does not. It's all self serving, as they are publicly funded, their citizens are forced to pay for the vile programming even if (like me) they despise it and ban it from their homes. They fear a more capitalist UK would reduce funding, so they try and keep the country as brain dead as they possibly can

So they take aim at the prime example of capitalism, the US. Creating nonsense anti US memes whose spread is accelerated by jealousy (ironically because UK standard of living is lower due to increased socialism!).

Jealousy? Maybe the US just... you know... fucked up the world economy some years ago ... Nah, probably unrelated

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

That's what people are on about when they talk about "having a choice."

Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.

Thank you for your well-phrased rebuttals. You made a firm case for why someone should avoid buying both the iPod Touch and the Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 based on their inherent WiFi-only limitations.

My last post's goal was to emphasize what the Galaxy Player 4.0/50 can do that the iPod Touch cannot. For the extra $30, the added features list of the Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 is attractive when compared to those of the stock $200 8GB iPod Touch 4th Gen. As an owner of an iPod Touch 4th Gen, it is my fervent hope that Apple pay more attention to iPod Touch development, which has fallen well behind the iPhone's, thus calling into question that old adage that "the iPod Touch is an iPhone without the phone." I don't think that comparison is as true as it once was. A comparison of specs need not be adversarial or denigrating. How can a product improve without an honest assessment of shortcomings?

Regarding sales. The Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 just released (officially)
in the US on Oct/17/2011. Given the intervening time and the iPod line's dominance, I daresay the iPod Touch's sales figures are greater and will continue to be for some time.
Time will tell.

Enjoy your bindle of microSD cards. I'll take a device that doesn't have to rely on cards the size of my pinky fingernail to have a large capacity.

I envy your ability to both foresee usage needs and afford the maximum amount of device storage possible for your iPod Touch. For those without such preternatural skill and monetary reservoirs, I appreciate the option to expand storage as needed without having to buy an entirely new device. Also, if storage requirements exceeded the iPod's maximum 64GB limits (recording LOTs of movies on holiday, for example), then multiple 32GB microSD cards would serve well in the absence of a laptop to download to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

Who would freely choose to have Flash? Serious question.

Seriously, those who are trying to load a web page requiring Adobe Flash.

The Galaxy Players' browser can render both HTML5 and Adobe Flash.
I never claimed that Adobe Flash was superior or even desirable. My fervent
belief in the merits of HTML5 will not help the iPod Touch's browser render
Adobe Flash on web pages that require it. Macintosh desktops/laptops support Adobe Flash for those very reasons. I don't see why this should be different for mobile devices.

Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.

Some might disagree. But they think different.

Here's what really going to throw you.
Given that "Apple's choice is always the best" and that you currently own an Apple product,
did you really choose Apple, or did Apple choose you?

Many people would rather leave these sorts of choices up to Apple. In their view, a user might dislike one of Apple's choices at first, but everybody always comes around to realizing that Apple's choice is always the best.

Some might disagree. But they think different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by equalunderthelaw

Here's what really going to throw you.
Given that "Apple's choice is always the best" and that you currently own an Apple product,
did you really choose Apple, or did Apple choose you?

I'm not getting into a mudslinging contest on this matter, but Apple/Jobs has/had a fairly good history of ripping people's ideas off. Remember Watson/Sherlock? Fax as a printer (that one goes back to the NeXT era), etc.

That may be so, but Patents and similar IP issues do not apply here.

This was theft by Samsung of a copyrighted image.

Copyright theft cases are very much clearcut. Their very slight manipulations don't even put it anywhere close to "Fair Use", particularly since it was used for advertising.

This one by Samsung was criminally stupid as well as criminal. Throw the book at 'em.

While I have enjoyed the refreshingly honest and introspective discussion about the Apple iPod Touch
and Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0/5.0 specs, I think our discussion has strayed to far afield of the the
original focus of this thread.

I reiterate that the 2008 link http://www.samsung.com/galaxyplayer50 (Likely dug up by
an unconstrained Google search and now redirected by Samsung) making the rounds has nothing to
do with the current Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 and 5.0 released in the US on Oct/16/2011.

This "Samsung shill" owns and loves his iPod Touch 4th Gen., but my love is not blind to the things that
it cannot do. The Samsung Galaxy Player 4.0 & 5.0 happen to have some of the features I crave.
I hope that this modest competition inspires Apple to improve the iPod Touch in a manner that brings
it more in line with the full non-phone features of the iPhone 4/4s. If it is wrong to want more from
my iPod Touch, then I am wrong.

I have. I miss NOTHING. There is NOTHING Flash-based without a standards alternative

I was convinced at his first post. Don't ignore, report.

He seems civil and logical - let's string him up to the highest tree because he might be a paid shill. Last time i checked that wasn't against the rules on this forum as long as you weren't advertising in a spammy post. Flash has many attributes and HTML5 is also a pain in the ass to work with from a developer perspective. I can totally see why people love it and hate it but there is no reason to be a zealot for either side. As always, if you don't like, don't buy it. Live and let live.

Nice try. But the rhetoric employed in the totality of your posts is well in line with the typical troll masquerading as an Apple fan "who just wants more."
Many of us here have been at it a long time and can see this coming a mile away.

Ah, you have hit upon the very crux of the disagreement.

I am not an Apple fan, but I do own and love an
iPod Touch 4th Gen 8GB (Model MC540LL) now running
IOS Version 5.0 (9A334). Personally, I reserve fan
allegiance for watching sports, not making technology
purchasing decisions. If others are Apple fans, in every
sense of the word, then that's fine by me. I understand the
appeal, but I do not personally subscribe to it.

If you are saying that the iPod Touch has no room for improvement,
e.g. moving close to the iPhone 4/4s in non-cellular functionality and
processing power, then we shall have to agree to disagree.

In all fairness, once you leave the USA, most countries and their media outlets could be referred to as "anti-Israel," and most don't see this as a bad thing.

Israel is a pretty horrible place. It has a racist, quasi-fascist government. It violates international law with great regularity. It violates almost every treaty it signs. It was the only "western" country to strongly support apartheid in South Africa and now supports a very similar system within it's own borders.

Being "anti-Israel" (not anti-Semitic), is a very common point of view outside of the USA.

To be fair to Israel, the US government at the time characterized N. Mandela and the ANC as a terrorist and a terrorist organization. The US government at the time also opposed putting sanctions of the S. African government and kept sending aid to the racist South African government.

There were many right wing government officials who were "sympathetic" to the S. African government.

So the US while not overtly pro apartheid definitely weren't going out of their way to stop it either.